US Denies That It's Ready To Dump The ITU Over Internet Regulations

from the get-a-backbone dept

Last week, we covered the key fight at the ITU's World Conference on Telecommunications (WCIT) and it was all over just one word: would any new international telecom regulations apply to "recognized operating agencies" or just "operating agencies." The difference may sound minor, but it could mean a world of difference. If it's just recognized operating agencies, then the rules are limited to giant national telcos. If it's all "operating agencies" then the rules could apply to, well, just about everyone who runs any kind of internet service. This is a huge difference. As the debate rages on -- and even as the worst proposal from Russia, China, Saudi Arabia and others is now off the table -- reports started circulating that the US had announced that it was prepared to walk away from WCIT entirely if there was continued movement towards significant changes in internet governance. That was seen as a pretty big threat, because a US rejection of the overall process might doom it from any sort of acceptance. However, in an emailed statement, US ambassador Terry Kramer is claiming that the reports that he's made such a threat are simply untrue (and not particularly helpful):

In the past few days, a small number of media reports have characterized the United States as “threatening” to withdraw from the WCIT negotiations. These speculative reports are inaccurate and unhelpful to the Conference. The United States has made no such threat, and it remains fully committed to achieving a successful conclusion to the WCIT.

To be honest, whether or not it's "helpful," it seems like it might actually be a lot more effective. As some are beginning to point out, almost everything about the ITU is a mess, and it's time that the US stood up and told it to stop messing where it doesn't belong. That article quotes former White House CTO Andrew McLaughlin describing why the ITU has no business regulating the internet.

"What is so bad about the ITU?" Mr. McLaughlin asked in a speech to the New America Foundation in Washington on Nov. 29. "It's just simple things like the nature, structure, culture, values and processes of the ITU. They are all inimical to a free and open Internet, and they are all inconsistent with the nature of the technical infrastructure that now characterizes our communications networks." Voting rules let repressive governments "engage in horse trading that has nothing to do with the technical merits of the decisions under consideration."

what the ITU is trying to do is exactly what the USA wants to do. perhaps the thought now is 'if we keep in with the ITU so we know exactly what is going on, we can twist things round so we can get the control instead of the ITU having it. if we walk away and things collapse, we will never get the control of the internet that we want and have been planning since we started ramping up old laws and introducing new ones under the pretense of backing the entertainment industries!'

Man, I don't think you'll ever catch on to liars and lying, Mike.

Look. "The US" (a mix of not-necessarily aligned entities) may eventually nix this, but right now, you're just speculating. Some statements from official sources you want to believe, and some you consider lies, but you're not any nearer to knowing the final result than anyone else outside those with actual knowledge of which way "the US" position is set. My bet is "the US" betrays its citizens somehow.

[Today in Writing 101: a careful writer avoids the phrase "to be honest", because always implies that writer is having to remind self to appear so when usual inclination is otherwise. At best it's unnecessary and hackneyed except in dialogue where the intent is to impeach character. In factual writing, just write what you believe: the reader will judge you. You definitely do NOT gain credibility by pointing out that for this one time, you're square with the reader.]

Re: Man, I don't think you'll ever catch on to liars and lying, Mike.

Normally I want to "Report" you but you are so close to making an "Insightful" comment, you win.

I mostly agree with the distrust ootb's comment makes about the US. The last decade has been one of watching the US pull "Bad Stuff" so often that, well, I expect deceit instead of honesty and good things.

quod erat demonstrandum

Disband the ITU

Great article! There is a bunch of great links in it. I especially like the Wall Street Journal article with Mr. McLaughlin. I had no idea the Secretary General of the (ITU), Hamadoun Toure was from Mali. A country in north western Africa.

I want on Wikipedia and typed in Mali. It turns out 90% of the population in that country is Islam. Now the whole ITU conference is starting to make sense. The ITU is basically a tool for authoritarian and totalitarian dictatorships to try and exert their control over communication systems.

I also went on Wikipedia and learned the different between an authoritarian and totalitarian dictatorship. If the ITU had it's way, I would have never been able to look this information up.

I would say Russia is definitely a totalitarian dictatorship. The Chinese and Arabs probably borderline more as an authoritarian dictatorship.

I also found it somewhat amusing that Egypt tried to distance themselves from a Russian-led submission to increased government control of the internet. Then Egypt tried to say that the whole thing was a "mere misunderstanding". Gee, do you think that had something to do with the huge uprisings going on in Egypt? You can bet your ass the Egyptian government submitted that proposal to restrict the internet, and meant every word of it.